In his article (BrotherAli) spake wondersome words:

| Gen. 49:10 "The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from
| between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of
| the people be."

You might want to look up the whole prophecy of Genesis 49:8-12
in the NIV translation.

Let me quote from the Expositor's Bible Commentary, volume 2:

  The point of Jacob's words is that Judah will hold such a status among 
  the tribes of Israel until on comes "to whom it belongs." Those who
  reign from the house of Judah will do so in anticipation of the one to
  whom the kingship truly belongs. The word "Shiloh," found in some English 
  translations is simply an untranslated form of the Hebrew  expression
  meaning "one to whom it belongs". It is not a name as such.  [page 276]

That was just to clear up a bit of the meaning. It doesn't answer yet your
construction, to which I will turn now.

| Both Jews and Christians believe this to be one of the foremost Messianic
| prophecies. As Muslims, we cannot deny that Jesus was the Messiah because
| the Qur'an gives him that title.
| Even if Jesus' prophetic mission were recognised by the Jews, his
| Messianic office could never be accepted by them.

Why? The two can easily go together. And have to go together, since
Jesus claimed to be the Messiah. He can not be accepted as prophet when
he didn't speak the truth on that claim. Muslims say that prophets do
not lie, why do you think that Jews would accept him as prophet but say
that he lied about the Messiah bit? That is non-sense.

| The Jews expect a
| Messiah with a sword and temporal power, a conqueror who would restore and
| extend the kingdom of David, and a Messiah who would gather the dispersed
| tribes of Israel unto the Holy Land.

Yes, many Jews expected so. But in fact, there are two strands of 
messianic prophecies in the Jewish scriptures. The King, and the suffering
servant. Jesus is both. The suffering servant in his first coming, and
visibly the sovereign King in his second coming. And we will see later
that Jesus addresses this wrong expectation in exactly the verses you
are quoting at the end of your article. I don't even need to bring up
any othe evidence than what you have already provided.

Whether the Jewish expectation was exactly correct is not the topic. 
The topic is what the prophecies say in their totality.

| The Jews are vainly expecting the coming of Shiloh and the Christians are
| persisting in their error in believing that it was Jesus who was intended
| by Shiloh because:

Shiloh is not a name. But anyway, let us look at your ideas, and where
the errors are residing.

| 1) The sceptre and the legislator would remain in the tribe of Judah until
| the coming of Shiloh. According to the Jew, Shiloh has not come yet. It
| would follow that both the sceptre and the prophetical succession were
| still in existence and belonged to that tribe but both of these
| institutions are now extinct.

That indicates that the Messiah (or even "Shiloh" if you want to insist)
really had to have come already. I agree. Now who is he?

| 2) The tribe of Judah has disappeared with its royal authority and
| prophetical succession. The Jews are forced to accept one or the other of
| two alternatives: 1. Either admit that Shiloh has come already and their
| forefathers did not recognise him, or 2. Accept the fact that there no
| longer exists a tribe of Judah from which Shiloh will have to descend.

Not that easy. The Jewish people still exist. But the point is, in the
destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D. all the tablets with the register
of lineage were destroyed. And even if Jewish families still have a 
personal knowledge of their decendency, they can't prove it anymore. 

That is another hint, that the Messiah indeed has come before, while his 
descendancy could still be established. 

| 3) The text clearly implies that Shiloh is to be a total stranger to the
| tribe of Judah, and even to all the other tribes. The prediction clearly
| states that when Shiloh comes the sceptre and the lawgiver will depart
| from Judah. This can only be realised if Shiloh is a stranger to Judah. 

You are already contradicting yourself! In your last line of 2) you wrote:
"Judah from which Shiloh will have to descend." and now you say, it clearly
says, that Shiloh is NOT from Judah. I think you will have to decide first
what you really want to say. And I think it is pretty clear that your
first (probably unintentional slip of the tongue) statement is true.

The bigger part of the Prophecy of Jacob about his son Judah is about 
this "one (king) who is to come" (verses 10-12). And even the kingship
before him is belonging to Judah up to this time. It would be very strange
if the main prophecy spoken over Judah would be in fact NOT about his
descendant. Then why would it be a prophecy over Judah? 
No, it IS about this king, coming out of Judah's line. 
God is in many prophecies narrowing down the lineage: Abraham, Isaac,
Judah, Jesse, David. At this time, it is the stage of selecting Judah
to be the forefather of the King to come.

| If
| Shiloh is a descendant of Judah, how could those two elements cease to
| exist in that tribe? This observation explodes the Christian claim as
| well. Jesus is a descendant of Judah from his mother's side.

Well, where does it say they WILL cease to exist? It says they will NOT
depart (at least) until the one comes to whom they truly belong. And for
sure they will not depart from him to whom they belong. 

It does NOT say they will depart from Judah WHEN "shiloh" comes. It says
the kingship belongs to Judah until that time and nothing is said at this
point about the time afterwards. But from the many other passages, it is 
clear that the messianic kingship is forever and there will be no departing.
So, this prophecy here only makes clear that the kingship up to that time
will belong to Judah (also). 

But wherever this person comes from, it says: UNTIL then, the scepter will
not depart. Now, has there been any substantial change for the Jews between
600 and 1900 A.D.? How then do you have this strange idea of thinking this
justifies Muhammad to be this "shiloh"?

No, the dispersion of the Jews all over the world and the destruction of
the records of lineage have happened 70 A.D. The year 600 A.D. (Muhammad) 
did not bring any change for the question of Jewish royalty. How on earth 
then can you relate that prophecy to Muhammad? The royal scepter was already
gone for 500 years, although it supposedly didn't depart until he comes!

No, only Jesus qualifies for that. 

| Jesus knew what type of Messiah the Jews were expecting and he rejected
| their idea that the Messiah they were hoping for would be a son of David.
| Matthew Ch. 22: 
| 41: While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, 
| 42 Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him,
| The son of David.
| 43 He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord,
| saying, 44 The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I
| make thine enemies thy footstool?
| 45 If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?

Jesus didn't reject that the Messiah would be a son of David. You just
confirmed above, that Jesus is a descendend from David and is the Messiah.

Jesus only questioned them in regard to their expectations of this son
of David. Especially, how can David himself call him Lord, when he indeed
would "only" be his "human descendant"?

And this passage is important in several more respects.

Muhammad first did all his wars and then died, and it is never even said 
about him that he will sit to the right hand [the position of power] of 
God himself. 

The prophecy of David says, that the Messiah is called Lord [would you use
that name for Muhammad?], and that he sits to the right side of God,
UNTIL all his enemies are subdued by God himself, not AFTER they are subdued.

[And Muhammad hasn't subdued ALL enemies anyway. The passage about "Shiloh"
 also speaks of ALL nations. Muhammad got pretty influential in Arabia, but
 that was it. And then he was died. I don't think we can say Shiloh = 
 Muhammad = Islam. And even if, Islam has only 20% of the worlds population.]

Jesus now [as before his coming] but even if you don't believe that,
at least NOW [that is what he says at his trial, when the High priest
asks him] sits at the right hand of God awaiting his glorious return
in power, when he will reign supreme. He is called Lord by David even
BEFORE he will reign over his enemies, while he still waits for this

Will Muhammad come back and reign and be king? Jesus will and there
are dozens of prophecies about it.

Summary of David's prophecy: 
Jesus stresses, that David calls the Messiah Lord [the title of God],
he stresses that he is Lord even before he is reigning over his enemies,
So, Jesus makes clear to the Jews, do not wait in the FIRST time of his 
coming for a mighty king, because this Lord will still have to wait for 
his enemies to be subdued, but he is ALREADY Lord, though in a veiled way.
Though Jesus/the Messiah is by human descend a son of David, he is much
more, he is called Lord. Jesus asks HOW is he his son. He does not say,
He is NOT his son. He was trying to tell them about their false expectation
in regard to his sonship, a sonship that is connected to LORDSHIP by David
himself. Not only to lordship over the people at the time of his coming,
but over David himself [and all God's enemies] across all time [David was 
1000 years before Christ.]

There still awaits to be turned up even one clear prophecy about Muhammad
in the Torah or Gospel. This definitely was not one. 

Book recommendation: 
Fred J Meldau, The Prophets Still Speak: Messiah in Both Testaments,
1988, Publisher: Friends of Israel, ISBN 0-915540-41-X
Which examines over 300 fulfilled prophecies about Jesus. 

Can anybody insist that Muhammad was foremost on God's mind when God
gave 300 [actually nearly 1000 - this book only looks at the fulfilled
ones, the ones about his second coming aren't even considered yet] 
prophecies about Jesus, but nothing clear at all about Muhammad? 
Did God get that balance so woefully wrong? Did he change his mind 
later after the Bible was already complete? Questions, questions, 

Yet never shall they be satisfied ...

So we have a second round:

To: soc.religion.christian 
Subject: Re: Muhammad is the "Shiloh" of Gen. 49:10

In article <4kkld5$>, 
(BrotherAli) writes:

| ``And you think Shiloh refers to Muhammad. 
| But how does Muhammad fulfill the part about gathering the people of 
| Israel to himself?''
| I will ask you the same about Jesus. How does Jesus fulfil the part about
| gathering the people of Israel to himself? Jn. 1:11-"He came unto his own,
| and his own received him not." Where in Gen. 49:10 does it say that the
| people that are to be gathered are Jews only? Or are you admitting that
| Jesus was only sent to the lost sheep as he stated in Mt. 15:24-"But he
| answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of
| Israel."

Well, I have given you an interpretation and asked you many questions, 
which you seem not to be willing to answer. Why? You respond to David 
Wallis' question just by putting a counter question. But that doesn't
lend any credibility to your proposal that Muhammad is Shiloh. 

Anyway, I will answer your question nevertheless.

First note: Gen. 49:10 does not speak of "gathering the people of Israel"
but gathering ALL peopleS [nations] to himself. 

Then, let see where we find something like that in the life of Jesus.

John 12:

20   Now there were some Greeks among those who went up to worship at the
21   They came to Philip, who was from Bethsaida in Galilee, with a request.
     "Sir," they said, "we would like to see Jesus."
22   Philip went to tell Andrew; Andrew and Philip in turn told Jesus.
23   Jesus replied, "The hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified.
24   I tell you the truth, unless a kernel of wheat falls to the ground and
     dies, it remains only a single seed. But if it dies, it produces many
25   The man who loves his life will lose it, while the man who hates his
     life in this world will keep it for eternal life.
26   Whoever serves me must follow me; and where I am, my servant also will
     be. My Father will honor the one who serves me.
27   "Now my heart is troubled, and what shall I say? `Father, save me from
     this hour'? No, it was for this very reason I came to this hour.
28   Father, glorify your name!" Then a voice came from heaven, "I have
     glorified it, and will glorify it again."
29   The crowd that was there and heard it said it had thundered; others
     said an angel had spoken to him.
30   Jesus said, "This voice was for your benefit, not mine.
31   Now is the time for judgment on this world; now the prince of this
     world will be driven out.

32   But I, when I am lifted up from the earth, 
            will draw all men to myself."

33   He said this to show the kind of death he was going to die.

This statement by Jesus is coming in response to GREEK people trying to meet
him. Not Jewish people living in Israel. No, foreigners who came to Israel
and then have the request to speak to Jesus. 

We are not told if Jesus actually met them and talked to them. But it is the
occasion Jesus uses to make [once again] clear that his death will be for the 
benefit of ALL people from all nations. And at Pentecost this gathering of 
people from different nations and languages immediately begins [Acts 2].

And the faith in Jesus spread very quickly over all the world. He was indeed
doing exactly what he promised and what Genesis predicted. 

On Matthew 15:24 and Jesus statement of: "sent only to the lost sheep of 
Israel" I wonder if you are only posting to the Islamic newsgroup or also
reading when I explained just that passage last week in a pretty elaborate
2 part posting. Now you ask that question on the Christian newsgroup.

Anyway. I will answer it again, and send my Bible study on this to this
group too [under the title "Jesus only for Israel?].

Bible Commentary Index
Answering Islam Home Page